Heterotrimeric G Protein g Subunits Provide Functional Selectivity in Gbg Dimer Signaling in Arabidopsis OA Yuri Trusov, a James Edward Rookes, a Kimberley Tilbrook, a David Chakravorty, a Michael Glenn Mason, a David Anderson, a Jin-Gui Chen, b,1 Alan M. Jones, b and Jose ´ Ramo ´ n Botella a,2 a Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory, Department of Botany, School of Integrative Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia b Departments of Biology and Pharmacology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 The Arabidopsis thaliana heterotrimeric G protein complex is encoded by single canonical Ga and Gb subunit genes and two Gg subunit genes (AGG1 and AGG2), raising the possibility that the two potential G protein complexes mediate different cellular processes. Mutants with reduced expression of one or both Gg genes revealed specialized roles for each Gg subunit. AGG1-deficient mutants, but not AGG2-deficient mutants, showed impaired resistance against necrotrophic pathogens, reduced induction of the plant defensin gene PDF1.2, and decreased sensitivity to methyl jasmonate. By contrast, both AGG1- and AGG2-deficient mutants were hypersensitive to auxin-mediated induction of lateral roots, suggesting that Gbg1 and Gbg2 synergistically inhibit auxin-dependent lateral root initiation. However, the involvement of each Gg subunit in this root response differs, with Gbg1 acting within the central cylinder, attenuating acropetally transported auxin signaling, while Gbg2 affects the action of basipetal auxin and graviresponsiveness within the epidermis and/or cortex. This selectivity also operates in the hypocotyl. Selectivity in Gbg signaling was also found in other known AGB1-mediated pathways. agg1 mutants were hypersensitive to glucose and the osmotic agent mannitol during seed germination, while agg2 mutants were only affected by glucose. We show that both Gg subunits form functional Gbg dimers and that each provides functional selectivity to the plant heterotrimeric G proteins, revealing a mechanism underlying the complexity of G protein–mediated signaling in plants. INTRODUCTION Heterotrimeric G proteins are an important element of trans- membrane signal transduction, coupling stimuli as diverse as light, neurotransmitters, odorants, tastants, and hormones. They are found in a variety of eukaryotic organisms, including plants, fungi, and animals. The classical heterotrimer consist of three different subunits, a, b, and g, which are organized in a highly conserved structure and typically bound to specific G protein– coupled receptors. Activation of the receptor by ligand binding induces a conformational change in Ga, catalyzing the exchange of GDP to GTP. GTP loading causes a protein conformational change that promotes dissociation of the heterotrimer into two functional signaling elements: the Ga subunit and the Gbg dimer. These two elements (functional subunits) interact with specific effector molecules controlling downstream signaling. The inher- ent GTPase activity of the Ga subunit hydrolyzes its bound GTP, leading to the reassociation of Ga and the Gbg dimer, returning the heterotrimer to its inactive GDP-bound state. While interac- tion between Ga and the Gbg dimer is dependent on the conformational status of the Ga subunit, interaction between Gb and Gg is essentially nondissociable; therefore, the Gbg dimer acts as a single functional unit in the cell (Gautam et al., 1998). It was initially thought that signaling in animals only occurred via the activated Ga subunit, with the role of Gbg being to inhibit the action of Ga by reforming the inactive heterotrimer and guiding Ga back to the receptor for reactivation. However, it is now established that the Gbg dimer is an active signaling factor in at least as many processes as the Ga subunit (Clapham and Neer, 1997). Among others, the Gbg dimer is able to interact with adenylyl cyclases, potassium channels, and phospholipases (Clapham and Neer, 1993; Scott et al., 2001). Aside from the activation of specific downstream effectors, the Gbg dimer is involved in receptor recognition (Lim et al., 2001), membrane targeting, and activation of the Ga subunit (Evanko et al., 2000, 2001). Binding between Ga and Gbg occurs at a molecular interface largely contained within the b-propeller structure of Gb. With the exception of Gb5, there is little binding preference between Ga and Gb pairs. Therefore, it is assumed that Gg provides a major share of the structural requisite for the selective coupling of the heterotrimer to the receptor and the Gbg dimer to its effectors (Gautam et al., 1990; Simon et al., 1991; Hou et al., 2000; Myung and Garrison, 2000; Azpiazu and Gautam, 2002; Chen et al., 2005; Myung et al., 2006). Recent evidence indicates that some animal Gbg dimers can move from the plasma 1 Current address: Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada. 2 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail j.botella@ uq.edu.au; fax 61-7-33651699. The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantcell.org) is: Jose ´ Ramo ´n Botella ( [email protected]). OA Open Access articles can be viewed online without a subscription. www.plantcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1105/tpc.107.050096 The Plant Cell, Vol. 19: 1235–1250, April 2007, www.plantcell.org ª 2007 American Society of Plant Biologists
17
Embed
Heterotrimeric G Protein g Subunits Provide Functional ... · Heterotrimeric G Protein g Subunits Provide Functional Selectivity in Gbg Dimer Signaling in Arabidopsis OA Yuri Trusov,a
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Heterotrimeric G Protein g Subunits Provide FunctionalSelectivity in Gbg Dimer Signaling in Arabidopsis OA
Yuri Trusov,a James Edward Rookes,a Kimberley Tilbrook,a David Chakravorty,a Michael Glenn Mason,a
David Anderson,a Jin-Gui Chen,b,1 Alan M. Jones,b and Jose Ramon Botellaa,2
a Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory, Department of Botany, School of Integrative Biology, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Queensland 4072, Australiab Departments of Biology and Pharmacology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280
The Arabidopsis thaliana heterotrimeric G protein complex is encoded by single canonical Ga and Gb subunit genes and
two Gg subunit genes (AGG1 and AGG2), raising the possibility that the two potential G protein complexes mediate different
cellular processes. Mutants with reduced expression of one or both Gg genes revealed specialized roles for each Gg
subunit. AGG1-deficient mutants, but not AGG2-deficient mutants, showed impaired resistance against necrotrophic
pathogens, reduced induction of the plant defensin gene PDF1.2, and decreased sensitivity to methyl jasmonate. By
contrast, both AGG1- and AGG2-deficient mutants were hypersensitive to auxin-mediated induction of lateral roots,
suggesting that Gbg1 and Gbg2 synergistically inhibit auxin-dependent lateral root initiation. However, the involvement of
each Gg subunit in this root response differs, with Gbg1 acting within the central cylinder, attenuating acropetally
transported auxin signaling, while Gbg2 affects the action of basipetal auxin and graviresponsiveness within the epidermis
and/or cortex. This selectivity also operates in the hypocotyl. Selectivity in Gbg signaling was also found in other known
AGB1-mediated pathways. agg1 mutants were hypersensitive to glucose and the osmotic agent mannitol during seed
germination, while agg2 mutants were only affected by glucose. We show that both Gg subunits form functional Gbg dimers
and that each provides functional selectivity to the plant heterotrimeric G proteins, revealing a mechanism underlying the
complexity of G protein–mediated signaling in plants.
INTRODUCTION
Heterotrimeric G proteins are an important element of trans-
membrane signal transduction, coupling stimuli as diverse as
light, neurotransmitters, odorants, tastants, and hormones. They
are found in a variety of eukaryotic organisms, including plants,
fungi, and animals. The classical heterotrimer consist of three
different subunits, a, b, and g, which are organized in a highly
conserved structure and typically bound to specific G protein–
coupled receptors. Activation of the receptor by ligand binding
induces a conformational change in Ga, catalyzing the exchange
of GDP to GTP. GTP loading causes a protein conformational
change that promotes dissociation of the heterotrimer into two
functional signaling elements: the Ga subunit and the Gbg dimer.
These two elements (functional subunits) interact with specific
effector molecules controlling downstream signaling. The inher-
ent GTPase activity of the Ga subunit hydrolyzes its bound GTP,
leading to the reassociation of Ga and the Gbg dimer, returning
the heterotrimer to its inactive GDP-bound state. While interac-
tion between Ga and the Gbg dimer is dependent on the
conformational status of the Ga subunit, interaction between
Gb and Gg is essentially nondissociable; therefore, the Gbg
dimer acts as a single functional unit in the cell (Gautam et al.,
1998).
It was initially thought that signaling in animals only occurred
via the activated Ga subunit, with the role of Gbg being to inhibit
the action of Ga by reforming the inactive heterotrimer and
guiding Ga back to the receptor for reactivation. However, it is
now established that the Gbg dimer is an active signaling factor
in at least as many processes as the Ga subunit (Clapham and
Neer, 1997). Among others, the Gbg dimer is able to interact with
adenylyl cyclases, potassium channels, and phospholipases
(Clapham and Neer, 1993; Scott et al., 2001). Aside from the
activation of specific downstream effectors, the Gbg dimer is
involved in receptor recognition (Lim et al., 2001), membrane
targeting, and activation of the Ga subunit (Evanko et al., 2000,
2001). Binding between Ga and Gbg occurs at a molecular
interface largely contained within the b-propeller structure of Gb.
With the exception of Gb5, there is little binding preference
between Ga and Gb pairs. Therefore, it is assumed that Gg
provides a major share of the structural requisite for the selective
coupling of the heterotrimer to the receptor and the Gbg dimer to
its effectors (Gautam et al., 1990; Simon et al., 1991; Hou et al.,
2000; Myung and Garrison, 2000; Azpiazu and Gautam, 2002;
Chen et al., 2005; Myung et al., 2006). Recent evidence indicates
that some animal Gbg dimers can move from the plasma
1 Current address: Department of Botany, University of British Columbia,Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada.2 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail [email protected]; fax 61-7-33651699.The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to thefindings presented in this article in accordance with the policy describedin the Instructions for Authors (www.plantcell.org) is: Jose RamonBotella ( [email protected]).OA Open Access articles can be viewed online without a subscription.www.plantcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1105/tpc.107.050096
The Plant Cell, Vol. 19: 1235–1250, April 2007, www.plantcell.org ª 2007 American Society of Plant Biologists
membrane to the Golgi upon receptor activation, providing an
extra element of spatial segregation to the Gbg dimer in G protein–
mediated signaling. The Gg subunit type and the Ga subunit
nucleotide exchange properties strongly influence the rate of
translocation (Akgoz et al., 2004, 2006; Azpiazu et al., 2006).
A characteristic of mammalian systems is the existence of
gene families for each of the G protein subunits. At least 23 Ga
subunits, 6 Gb subunits (including an alternatively spliced var-
iant), and 12 Gg subunits (Gautam et al., 1998; Balcueva et al.,
2000) have been reported in humans, but not all possible com-
binations are present in the cell, with combinatorial multiplicity of
Gbg dimers being restricted by the specific expression patterns
of the genes and selective interactions between different Gb and
Gg subunits. Nevertheless, a wide range of Gbg dimers, serving
as distinct signal transduction elements involved in different
processes, have been described (Camps et al., 1992; Katz et al.,
1992; Chen et al., 1997; Clapham and Neer, 1997; Gautam et al.,
1998; Bommakanti et al., 2000; Mirshahi et al., 2002; Krystofova
and Borkovich, 2005).
In contrast with mammalian systems, only one canonical Ga
subunit gene (GPA1) (Ma et al., 1990), one canonical Gb subunit
gene (AGB1) (Weiss et al., 1994), and two Gg subunit genes
(AGG1 and AGG2) (Mason and Botella, 2000, 2001) have been
found in the Arabidopsis thaliana genome. The same number of G
protein subunits were reported in the monocot species rice
(Oryza sativa) (Ishikawa et al., 1995, 1996; Iwasaki et al., 1997;
Kato et al., 2004); however, two Ga subunits were described
for legume species (Kim et al., 1995; Gotor et al., 1996; Marsh
and Kaufman, 1999). G proteins are implicated in a large variety
of processes in plants (Jones and Assmann, 2004; Perfus-
Barbeoch et al., 2004; Assmann, 2005; McCudden et al., 2005;
Temple and Jones, 2007); nevertheless, specific signaling roles
for the Ga subunit or Gbg dimers remained elusive until recently.
Analysis of T-DNA and ethyl methanesulfonate mutants lacking
functional Ga or Gb subunits showed that both Ga and Gbg
could be involved in specific and independent pathways (Ullah
et al., 2003; Joo et al., 2005; Chen et al., 2006a; Pandey et al.,
2006; Trusov et al., 2006) as well as in the same processes (Ullah
et al., 2003; Pandey et al., 2006). Studies using Arabidopsis
demonstrated that the Gb-deficient agb1-1 and agb1-2 mutants
have flowers with elongated peduncles, shortened flat-top si-
liques, rounded rosette leaves with crinkled surfaces, and in-
creased root mass (Lease et al., 2001; Ullah et al., 2003). Detailed
studies revealed that Gb modulates lateral root formation by
interfering with auxin-dependent cell division (Ullah et al., 2003).
It was shown that Gb-mediated signaling, but not Ga, plays a
distinct part in plant resistance against necrotrophic pathogens
(Llorente et al., 2005; Trusov et al., 2006). Specific changes in
seed germination were also ascribed to Gb activity (Pandey
et al., 2006; Trusov et al., 2006). Finally, analysis of transgenic
tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) plants with reduced Gb subunit
levels due to antisense expression of the Gb subunit mRNA
suggested that the Gb subunit is involved in regulation of the
reproductive phase of the tobacco life cycle, particularly in
stamen development and pollen maturation (Peskan-Berghofer
et al., 2005).
Strong interaction between plant Gb and each Gg subunit
was demonstrated in vitro (Mason and Botella, 2000, 2001) as
well as in vivo (Kato et al., 2004; Adjobo-Hermans et al., 2006,
Chakravorty and Botella, 2007). However, despite sequence
similarity (48% amino acid identity), the interaction between each
of the two Arabidopsis Gg subunits and Gb seems to be centered
in different domains of the protein (Mason and Botella, 2000,
2001; Temple and Jones, 2007).
Nothing is known about the cellular and physiological roles of
either of the two known Gg subunits, their possible functional
redundancy, and whether the two potential dimers, Gbg1 and
Gbg2, are involved in the same or different signaling pathways.
We took advantage of the extensive phenotypic characterization
of loss-of-function agb1 mutants, and using this inventory of
phenotypes, we asked which of the Gg subunits acts with Gb
to regulate a specific function. Fungal resistance, root develop-
ment, and glucose sensing were the three well-characterized
AGB1-signaling pathways examined in this study. By a genetic
approach, we dissected the roles of the Gg subunits in G protein
signaling in these pathways. Our results show that the different
Gg subunits form independent signal-transducing Gbg dimers
and impart functional selectivity to the heterotrimeric G protein
signaling network.
RESULTS
The Expression Profiles of AGG1 and AGG2 Are Distinct but
Together Overlap AGB1 Expression
Expression patterns for Ga and Gb subunit genes were previ-
ously reported in various plant species (Weiss et al., 1993; Huang
et al., 1994; Kaydamov et al., 2000; Perroud et al., 2000; Chen
et al., 2006c). In order to study the tissue-specific and develop-
mental regulation of the AGB1, AGG1, and AGG2 genes, trans-
genic Arabidopsis (Col-0) plants were produced containing
the promoter regions of each gene fused to the b-glucuronidase
(GUS) reporter gene. At least three independent lines were
characterized for each of the promoter constructs. Transgenic
plants did not show any obvious morphological alterations,
suggesting that inserts did not disrupt functional genes. GUS
histochemical assays revealed that all three genes are active
during early seedling development, with GUS activity detected
throughout the plant but highest at the hypocotyl–root junction in
We previously showed that Gb is also involved in resistance to
A. brassicicola (Trusov et al., 2006). Application of spores (106
spores/mL) on the leaf surface of Arabidopsis plants causes
necrotic lesions that are clearly different in the wild type and Gb-
deficient mutants. agb1-2, agg1, agg2, and agg1 agg2 mutants
along with wild-type Col-0 plants were inoculated with A.
brassicicola (Figure 3D), and disease progression was quantified
by measuring the necrotic lesion area (given as a percentage of
the droplet-inoculated area) (Figure 4E). Statistical analysis
showed two very distinct groups that are significantly different
from each other (P < 0.05). Lesions on agb1-2, agg1, and agg1
agg2 mutant leaves occupied ;50 to 60% of the inoculated
area, in contrast with wild-type plants and agg2 mutants, in
which an average of 30% of the inoculated area became
Figure 3. The Gg Subunit Is Involved in Defense against Necrotrophic Fungi.
(A) Induction of GUS activity by A. brassicicola in leaves of transgenic plants expressing the designated promoter:GUS fusion constructs. Arrows
indicate the region of infection.
(B) Fluorometric assessment of GUS activity in leaves and roots of transgenic plants expressing the designated promoter:GUS fusion constructs after
inoculation of roots with F. oxysporum. The bars represent expression ratios of pathogen-inoculated versus mock-inoculated plants. Error bars
represent SE of three replicates.
(C) Characteristic disease symptoms caused by F. oxysporum at 8 d after inoculation.
(D) Lesion development at 3 d after inoculation with A. brassicicola.
Selectivity by G Protein g Subunits 1239
Figure 4. Differential Responses of Gg-Deficient Mutants to Pathogen Attack and MeJA Treatment.
(A) Susceptibility of wild-type plants (Col-0) and Gb- and Gg-deficient mutants to F. oxysporum. For each genotype, 48 plants were inoculated and the
average percentage of decayed plants per line was scored in three independent experiments. Error bars represent SE.
(B) Inhibition of rosette growth after F. oxysporum inoculation expressed relative to the mean growth of the same genotype after mock inoculation. Mean
values and corresponding SD were calculated from 48 inoculated and 24 mock-inoculated plants for each genotype.
(C) Same as (A) for wild-type Ws ecotype and gpa1-1 and agg1-1w mutants.
(D) Expression of the defense-related gene PDF1.2 in response to A. brassicicola infection. Two-week-old wild-type and mutant plants were sprayed
with an A. brassicicola spore solution (106 spores/mL). Total RNA was extracted from infected leaf tissue at 20 h after inoculation. The blot was
hybridized with a PDF1.2 probe, stripped, and reprobed with a ribosomal probe as a control.
(E) Quantitative estimation of lesion development after A. brassicicola infection (106 spores/mL). The area covered by necrotic tissue was expressed as
a percentage of the inoculated area. Data points represent averages with SD of at least 30 lesions for each genotype. Letters indicate statistically
significant differences between genotypes (Student’s t test, P < 0.05, n ¼ 20).
(F) Germination percentages of at least 100 seeds pretreated with 10 mM paclobutrazol and sown on 0.53 MS, 1% sucrose, and 0.8% agar plates with
or without 50 mM MeJA. Germination was assessed at 2 d after transferring plates to 238C in continuous light. Bars represent averages with SE of three
independent experiments.
(G) Root growth inhibition in response to MeJA treatment. Seedlings were grown for 14 d on 13 MS and 2% sucrose plates supplemented with or
without 50 mM MeJA. At least 30 seedlings were measured for each genotype. Data are presented as percentages of the length of treated roots
compared with their respective nontreated controls. Bars represent averages with SD. Letters indicate statistically significant differences between
genotypes (Student’s t test, P < 0.05, n ¼ 30).
necrotic. In agreement with these observations, RNA gel blot
hybridization revealed that 20 h after infection with A. brassici-
cola, steady state levels of the plant defensin PDF1.2 transcript
were reduced in agb1-2, agg1, and agg1 agg2 mutants com-
pared with the wild type and agg2 mutants (Figure 4D).
It was previously established that the increased susceptibility
to fungal necrotrophic pathogens that was observed in Gb-
deficient mutants correlates with a decreased sensitivity to
methyl jasmonate (MeJA). Therefore, we assayed MeJA sensi-
tivity using a germination assay. All mutants showed reduced
sensitivity to MeJA compared with wild-type plants (Figure 4F),
although to different degrees: agb1-2 ¼ agg1 agg2 < agg1 <
agg2 < wild type. MeJA sensitivity was also assayed using root
length inhibition assays (Figure 4G). Two statistically different
groups (P < 0.05) were observed, the first one showing decreased
sensitivity to MeJA in agb1-2, agg1 agg2, and agg1 mutants and
the second one containing the wild type and agg2 mutants.
AGG1 and AGG2 Act Additively in Gbg-Mediated Lateral
Root Development
It has been established that Gb, but not Ga, attenuates auxin-
induced cell division leading to lateral root proliferation, although
it does not directly couple auxin signaling (Ullah et al., 2003; Chen
et al., 2006a). Figure 5A shows the number of lateral roots in
2-week-old wild-type plants and mutants deficient in Gb, Gg1,
Gg2, or both Gg subunits grown on vertical plates (0.53 MS, 1%
sucrose, and 0.8% agar, 16:8 day:night cycle, 238C). All mutants
produced more lateral roots than wild-type plants, but three
statistically distinct groups (P < 0.05) were observed within the
mutants: agb1-2 and double agg1 agg2 mutants had the highest
number of lateral roots, agg2-1 and agg2RNAi mutants pro-
duced fewer lateral roots, while agg1-1c and agg1RNAi had even
fewer roots (Figure 5A). Alteration of the growth conditions, such
as an increase in MS salt concentration (from 0.53 to 13) and
reduced temperature (from 23 to 218C) substantially (more than
three times) decreased the total number of lateral roots (Figure
5C, white bars) as well as the differences among the various
mutants and between mutants and the wild type.
To assay responsiveness to exogenous auxin, seedlings were
grown on medium supplemented with the auxin transport inhib-
itor N-1-naphthylphthalamic acid (NPA) and then transferred
to growth medium (13 MS) in the presence or absence of
1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA) for 5 d before scoring the
number of lateral roots (Figure 5B) (Himanen et al., 2002; Ullah
et al., 2003). All of the tested G protein mutants showed
increased sensitivity to NAA compared with wild-type plants.
The ratio of lateral roots developed on NAA-containing medium
versus control medium gives an additional indication of the
relative sensitivity to NAA: Col-0, 2.2; agb1-2, 3.9; agg1-1c, 4.1;
agg1RNAi, 3.6; agg2-1, 3.4; agg2RNAi, 3.6; and agg1 agg2, 4.0.
Exposure of Arabidopsis plants to high temperature (298C)
results in an increase in endogenous auxin levels (Gray et al.,
1998). Although that original work focused on the effect of
endogenous auxin induction on hypocotyl elongation, an in-
creased number of lateral roots was also observed (Gray et al.,
1998). In addition, it has been established that shoot-derived
auxin is required for the emergence of lateral root primordia
(Reed et al., 1998). agb1-2, agg1, agg2, and agg1 agg2 mutants
along with wild-type Col-0 plants were grown at either 21 or 298C
(13 MS), and the number of lateral roots was determined in
2-week-old plants. All genotypes showed a marked increase in
the number of lateral roots when grown at high temperature, with
the smallest effect (;2.5-fold increase) observed in wild-type
plants (Figure 5C). agg1-1c and agg1RNAi mutants displayed
5.5- and 4.6-fold increases, respectively, while agg2-1 and
agg2RNAi showed 3.2- and 3.5-fold increases, respectively.
Both agb1-2 and double agg1-1 agg2-1 mutants produced ap-
proximately seven times more lateral roots when grown at 298C
(Figure 5C). In addition, adventitious roots were frequently ob-
served (80 to 90% of seedlings) on hypocotyls of agb1-2, agg1
agg2, and agg1 mutants but never in wild-type plants or agg2
mutants (data not shown).
AGG1 and AGG2 Are Involved in the Modulation of
Acropetally and Basipetally Transported
Auxin Activity, Respectively
AGG1 and AGG2 expression in roots is cell-specific (Figure 1D),
correlating with acropetal and basipetal auxin streams, respec-
tively (Mitchell and Davies, 1975; Jones, 1998). Therefore, we
hypothesized that Gbg1 represses lateral root development from
the central cylinder by attenuating the activity of acropetally
transported auxin, while Gbg2 represses lateral root formation or
growth through the cortex/epidermis by affecting basipetal
auxin. It was established that shoot-derived auxin is the pre-
dominant source of auxin in young (5- to 7-d-old) Arabidopsis
roots, controlling lateral root emergence during early develop-
ment, while later in development, the root system gradually
reduces the dependence on shoot-derived auxin by synthesizing
a sufficient amount within the root tip at 10 d after germination
(although shoot-derived auxin is still important for primordial
outgrowth) (Bhalerao et al., 2002; Ljung et al., 2005). Therefore,
seedlings were grown for 7 d (13 MS) to allow maximal root
elongation before the root tip started to produce auxin, and then
acropetal auxin transport was inhibited by the method described
by Reed et al. (1998). Seedlings with the auxin transport inhibitor
NPA block placed at the root tip had only acropetal auxin
transport in the area of the root above the block, while seedlings
with the NPA block placed at the shoot–root junction should
develop lateral roots mainly under the control of basipetal
transport, with the exception of the fraction of roots initiated by
early acropetal auxin. The dynamics of lateral root emergence
was recorded during the 2-week period after the application of
the NPA block (Figures 6A and 6B). As expected, the rate of
lateral root production after both treatments was highest in the
agb1-2 and agg1 agg2 mutants and lowest in wild-type plants.
agg1-1c seedlings produced abundant lateral roots (statistically
indistinguishable from agb1-2 and agg1 agg2), despite the arrest
of basipetal transport (Figure 6A). Inhibition of acropetal trans-
port resulted in an initially high number of lateral roots in agg1-1c
seedlings (day 13 in Figure 6B), probably as a result of early
acropetal auxin flux before the block was applied. After the initial
peak, the rate of lateral root formation was similar to that in wild-
type plants (Figure 6B). By contrast, suppression of basipetal
Selectivity by G Protein g Subunits 1241
transport reduced lateral root numbers in agg2-1 to wild-type
levels (Figure 6A), while arrest of acropetal transport resulted in
elevated levels of lateral roots, statistically indistinguishable
from those of agb1-2 and agg1 agg2 mutants (Figure 6B). Similar
behavior was exhibited by the RNAi lines (data not shown).
To provide further evidence for the selective roles of the Gg1
and Gg2 subunits in roots, we analyzed two specific processes
dependent upon the two different auxin streams, adventitious
root formation in hypocotyls and root gravitropism. Adventitious
root formation predominantly relies on auxin transported within
the hypocotyl stele (Liu and Reid, 1992; Nicolas et al., 2004).
Aseptically excised wild-type and mutant hypocotyls were incu-
bated with the synthetic auxin NAA. agb1-2, agg1-1c, and agg1
agg2 mutants formed adventitious roots throughout the entire
hypocotyl, while in wild-type plants and the agg2-1 mutant
adventitious roots were not formed or were present only near the
ends of the hypocotyl segments (Figure 6C).
Rashotte and coworkers (2000) showed that inhibition of
basipetal auxin transport in roots completely blocked its gravity
response, while inhibition of acropetal transport only partially
reduced it. Therefore, we assayed the gravitropic response of
wild-type and G protein mutant roots by measuring the root angle
(measured from the horizontal position) at 24 h after gravistimu-
lation. Figure 6D shows that agb1-2, agg2-1, and agg1 agg2
mutants were less responsive to gravistimulation than wild-type
plants and agg1-1c (P < 0.001). Interestingly, agg1-1c was
slightly less responsive than the wild type (P < 0.05), probably
due to a limited participation of the acropetal auxin in the gravity
response (Rashotte et al., 2000).
AGG1 and AGG2 Are Involved in Different Responses
during Germination
Two recent reports established that Gb signaling plays a role in
germination (Pandey et al., 2006; Trusov et al., 2006). To deter-
mine the specific roles of each of the partner Gg subunits in this
process, mutants lacking Gb, Gg1, Gg2, or both Gg subunits
were subjected to germination tests. Since germination effi-
ciency is extremely sensitive to the growth conditions experi-
enced by the parental plant and postharvest storage, all seed lots
were collected at the same time from plants grown simulta-
neously under the same conditions and were stored for 2 months
at 48C in the dark. Approximately 100 sterilized seeds of all tested
lines were planted on the same Petri dish for a single treatment.
Germination and early development are regulated by many
Gbg-mediated signals, and glucose is arguably the best char-
acterized of those signals to date (Ullah et al., 2002; Pandey et al.,
2006; Wang et al., 2006). As shown in Figure 7A, there was a clear
difference between wild-type and mutant plants when germi-
nated in the presence of 6% glucose, while 4% glucose did not
discriminate among the different genotypes and 2% glucose
resulted in nearly 100% germination. Because light intensity also
has an effect on germination, we used two different intensities of
continuous light irradiation (63 and 150 mmol�m�2�s�1). The
higher light intensity resulted in faster germination rates, reach-
ing 90% by day 6 on glucose and by day 3 on mannitol (Figures
7C and 7E, respectively), obscuring any differences between
genotypes. By contrast, the slower germination rates observed
using a lower light intensity accentuated the differences among
genotypes. When sown on glucose under low light intensity,
agb1-2, agg1, and agg1 agg2 mutant seeds showed drastically
reduced germination rates compared with wild-type seeds, with
<50% germination after 2 weeks (Figure 7B). By contrast, at
higher light intensities, the differences between wild-type and
agb1 and agg1 mutant seeds were only observed at day 2 (Figure
7C). Interestingly, agg2 mutants also displayed significant inhi-
bition of germination on glucose, albeit at notably lower levels
than agg1 mutants. Again, the difference was statistically signif-
icant in lower light (Figure 7B), while at higher light this difference
was insignificant (Figure 7C).
Figure 5. Effect of the Loss of Gg Subunits on Lateral Root Formation.
(A) Average number of lateral roots in 2-week-old seedlings grown on vertical plates (0.53 MS, 1% sucrose, and 0.8% agar, 238C, 16:8 light:dark cycle).
Error bars represent SE. Letters indicate statistically significant differences between genotypes (Student’s t test, P < 0.05, n ¼ 15).
(B) Auxin-induced lateral root development. Seedlings were grown for 9 d on 5 mM NPA and transferred to plates with or without 0.1 mM NAA for an
additional 5 d under continuous light on vertical plates. The SD is based on at least 15 seedlings.
(C) High temperature–induced lateral root development. Seedlings were grown at 21 and 298C for 10 d, and the number of lateral roots was scored. The
SD is based on at least 15 seedlings.
1242 The Plant Cell
To discriminate between the signaling effect and the os-
motic stress component observed when plants are exposed
to high levels of sugar, we determined the effect of the
osmotic agent mannitol on germination at two light intensities.
Surprisingly, mannitol severely decreased germination rates in
agb1-2, agg1, and agg1 agg2 mutants at all time points under
the lower light intensity (Figure 7D) and at day 2 under higher
light (Figure 7E). By contrast, agg2 mutants initially showed
low germination rates but quickly reached wild-type levels by
day 6 under low light (Figure 7D) and were indistinguishable
from the wild type under higher light intensity at all time points
(Figure 7E).
DISCUSSION
Previously, the functional selectivity of Gg subunits was largely
unrecognized, with the general view that Gg function is limited to
anchoring the Gbg dimer to the membrane. However, Gg re-
cently emerged as an important element that provides effector
specificity as well as receptor selectivity for the heterotrimer
(Gautam et al., 1990; Hou et al., 2000; Akgoz et al., 2002; Azpiazu
and Gautam, 2002; Myung et al., 2006).
The initial discovery of single Ga and Gb subunits in Arabi-
dopsis challenged the concept that plants use combinatorial
subunit composition to define G protein receptor/effector
specificity (Arabidopsis Genome Initiative, 2000), as proven
in mammalian systems (Robishaw and Berlot, 2004). With the
recent discovery of two Gg subunits in Arabidopsis (Mason
and Botella, 2000, 2001), we must now address this possibil-
ity. Since both plant Gg subunits share a number of similarities
with animal Gg subunits, such as the strong interaction with
Gb and the presence of isoprenylation domains, it is reason-
able to expect that there are two operational Gbg subunits in
Arabidopsis. A number of logical questions follow, such as
whether the two subunits mediate the same processes or
whether they specialize in different developmental, biotic, or
abiotic responses. In this respect, it is interesting that AGG1
and AGG2 in situ expression profiles show a high degree of
Figure 6. Specific Roles of AGG1 and AGG2 in the Regulation of Auxin Response.
(A) and (B) Dynamics of lateral root formation after the arrest of basipetal (A) and acropetal (B) auxin transport. Conditions are described in the text. At
least 15 plants for each genotype were used in the assay. Error bars represent SD.
(C) Adventitious root development on excised hypocotyl explants. Seedlings were grown for 4 d in the dark and then for 1 d under light. Hypocotyls were
excised aseptically and transferred to plates containing 1 nM NAA. Excised hypocotyls were grown for an additional 10 d under continuous light and
photographed.
(D) Response to gravistimulation. Fifty to 60 seedlings of each genotype were grown on 13 MS plates for 5 d under continuous light and then moved
into darkness for an additional 24 h, and the plates were rotated 908. Bars represent average deviation of the angle (curvature) from the horizontal line.
Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences relative to the wild type (***P < 0.001, *P < 0.05). Error bars indicate SD.
Selectivity by G Protein g Subunits 1243
tissue specificity and that, even though the sum of their
individual expression patterns mimics the overall Gb expres-
sion, the two Gg gene expression patterns rarely overlap. This
raises the possibility that Gg subunits impose selective func-
tionality restricted by expression patterns.
The functions of the two Gg subunits are intrinsically linked to
Gb, since, based on mammalian studies, the Gbg dimer operates
as a single signaling unit. The Gb subunit has been associated
with a number of processes using loss-of-function mutants
(Lease et al., 2001; Ullah et al., 2003; Llorente et al., 2005;
Pandey et al., 2006; Trusov et al., 2006). However, according to
the classical mechanism of heterotrimeric G protein action, the
lack of a functional Gb subunit affects not only processes directly
mediated by Gb but also those mediated by Ga; therefore, some
of the processes affected in Gb mutants are actually regulated by
Ga (Ullah et al., 2003). In general, those phenotypes shared by
Ga- and Gb-deficient mutants are most likely due to disruption in
processes mediated by Ga, while disruption of processes me-
diated by Gb results in different or even opposite phenotypes
(Ullah et al., 2003). Therefore, to avoid complications in interpre-
tation, we chose processes with predominant Gb signaling,
namely, resistance against necrotrophic pathogens (Llorente,
et al., 2005; Trusov, et al., 2006), auxin-regulated lateral root
development (Ullah et al., 2003), and D-glucose inhibition of
germination (Ullah et al., 2002; Chen et al., 2006b; Pandey et al.,
2006; Wang et al., 2006).
Involvement of Gbg1 in Resistance against
Fungal Pathogens
Quantitative and in situ gene expression studies in transgenic
Arabidopsis reporter lines using two different pathogens gave
the first indication of the involvement of Gg1 along with Gb in the
defense mechanisms against necrotrophic fungi. These obser-
vations were confirmed by the fact that the Gb-deficient mutant
agb1-2 and all of the mutants lacking AGG1 (agg1-1c, agg1RNAi,
and agg1 agg2) showed increased susceptibility to F. oxysporum,
with no statistically significant differences observed between
them. The increased susceptibility of Gg1-deficient mutants to
F. oxysporum was shown for Col-0 and Ws. The slight increase in
resistance observed for Ga-deficient mutants suggests that, in
defense-related processes, Ga acts by sequestering the Gbg1
dimer to the inactive heterotrimeric complex, thus effectively
lowering the free available Gbg1 pool (Llorente et al., 2005; Trusov
et al., 2006). This is consistent with the finding that the expression
of GPA1 is not altered by pathogen exposure (Y. Trusov and J.R.
Botella, unpublished data). Even though A. brassicicola and
F. oxysporum are both necrotrophic fungi, their infection mech-
anisms are different. As for F. oxysporum, the responses of all
AGG1-deficient mutants and agb1-2 to A. brassicicola were
statistically indistinguishable, being more severely affected than
in the wild type. This finding suggests that the complete Gbg1
dimer is required for defense. By contrast, mutants deficient in
AGG2 but not AGG1 (agg2-1 and agg2RNAi) showed a wild-type
phenotype in their behavior against both pathogens, thus pre-
cluding any significant role of the Gbg2 dimer in pathogen
resistance.
Figure 7. Germination Assays in Gg-Deficient Mutants.
(A) Germination rates of wild-type plants and the indicated mutants at 5 d
after transfer to 238C in the presence of different concentrations of
glucose.
(B) and (C) Germination dynamics of wild-type plants and mutants on
medium (0.53 MS and 0.8% agar) containing 6% glucose under two
different light intensities, 63 mmol�m�2�s�1 (B) and 150 mmol�m�2�s�1 (C).
(D) and (E) Germination dynamics of wild-type plants and mutants on
medium (0.53 MS and 0.8% agar) containing 6% mannitol under two
different light intensities, 63 mmol�m�2�s�1 (D) and 150 mmol�m�2�s�1 (E).
Error bars indicate SD.
1244 The Plant Cell
The susceptibility data are consistent with the molecular
observations showing reduced induction of the plant defensin
PDF1.2 by A. brassicicola in agb1-2 and all mutants lacking
AGG1 (agg1-1c, agg1RNAi, and agg1 agg2) but wild-type in-
duction in agg2 mutants. In addition, all AGG1-deficient mutants
showed reduced responses to MeJA (statistically indistinguish-
able from Gb-deficient mutants), supporting the hypothesis that
MeJA signaling could be the link between G proteins and the
defense response (Trusov et al., 2006).
Regulation of Lateral Root Development by Gbg1- and
Gbg2-Mediated Signaling
In the young Arabidopsis primary root, auxin transport occurs
acropetally through the stele tissue from the first true leaves,
where it is primarily synthesized (Bhalerao et al., 2002). This auxin
stream initiates early lateral root primordia (Reed et al., 1998;
Bhalerao et al., 2002) and augments root-mediated auxin syn-
thesis (Ljung et al., 2005). At a later stage, the root meristem
synthesizes auxin, which moves up from the root tip through the
epidermis (Mitchell and Davies, 1975; Tsurumi and Ohwaki,
1978; Jones, 1990, 1998; Rashotte et al., 2001), influencing
lateral root initiation (Bhalerao et al., 2002; Ljung et al., 2005). Thus,
auxin in both streams initiates lateral root formation, but different
signaling mechanisms had not been distinguished previously.
We showed that AGB1, AGG1, and AGG2 are each expressed
in roots, with AGB1 expression being observed in the stele,
cortex, and epidermis, whereas AGG1 expression is restricted to
the stele and AGG2 is predominantly active in the cortex and
epidermis. Interestingly, none of the genes was expressed in
lateral root primordia or in pericycle cells, which become the
initials to lateral root meristems. Gb attenuates auxin signaling
during lateral root formation (Ullah et al., 2003), and we extended
this finding by showing the Gg subunits provide specificity in this
response. While both AGG1 and AGG2 are involved in the inhi-
bition of auxin-dependent lateral root initiation and both possible
dimers, Gbg1 and Gbg2, exert a synergistic effect in auxin
signaling attenuation, neither Gbg dimer type is able to compen-
sate for loss of the other. A likely explanation is that each dimer
acts on different branches of the auxin/lateral root pathway. This
duality does not occur in hypocotyls, as Gbg1, and not Gbg2,
attenuates auxin-induced adventitious roots in the hypocotyl.
Considering that AGG1 is expressed in the root stele, where
acropetal auxin transport occurs, while AGG2 is expressed in the
cortex and epidermis, which are known to accommodate basip-
etal auxin transport, we hypothesized that Gbg1 and Gbg2 could
be specifically involved in signaling for each of the two auxin
streams. Consistent with this, we found that inhibition of acrop-
etal auxin transport at the shoot–root junction affected agg1
mutants, while agg2 mutants were more responsive to the
inhibition of basipetal auxin transport arising from the root tip.
Furthermore, support for our hypothesis was provided by study-
ing the gravitropic response, a process that is dependent on
basipetal auxin transport. The reduced responsiveness of agb1-2
and the agg2 mutants is consistent with a signaling role for ba-
sipetally moving auxin in the root. Taking into account the locali-
zation of the proteins, we speculate that Gbg1 could mediate
internal signals while Gbg2 could be involved in external/envi-
ronmental signaling. Brassinosteroids and ethylene are logical
candidates to be such internal signals, since both brassinoste-
roids and ethylene signal transduction pathways are influenced
by heterotrimeric G proteins at various stages of plant devel-
opment (Ullah et al., 2002) and there is evidence that brassinos-
teroids and ethylene promote lateral root development by
increasing acropetal auxin transport (Bao et al., 2004) and by
increasing auxin content locally at pericycle founder cells (Aloni
et al., 2006). On the other hand, it is well known that a wide range
of soil characteristics, such as availability of water or nutrients,
can dramatically affect lateral root development (Vanneste et al.,
2005). Signaling from one or more of these factors could be
coupled by Gbg2.
Germination and G Protein Signaling
The role of G proteins in seed germination is intriguing
and complicated, since these proteins affect gibberellic acid,
abscisic acid, brassinosteroids, MeJA, ethylene, and auxin sig-
naling (Ashikari et al., 1999; Ueguchi-Tanaka et al., 2000; Wang
et al., 2001; Ullah et al., 2002; Lapik and Kaufman, 2003; Chen
et al., 2004; Pandey et al., 2006) as well as D-glucose sensitivity
(Ullah et al., 2002; Chen et al., 2006b; Pandey et al., 2006; Wang
et al., 2006). The gpa1 and agb1 null mutants show a number of
alterations in seed germination, suggesting that GPA1 and AGB1
are involved in this process, although their specific roles are not
known (Ullah et al., 2002; Chen et al., 2006b; Pandey et al., 2006).
Here, we focused on traits dependent on Gb-mediated signaling
to establish the specificity of the Gg subunits. The D-glucose
hypersensitive phenotype of the Gb null mutants is more severe
than that for the Ga null mutants, implying that the predominant
signaling element in D-glucose–regulated germination is the Gbg
dimer (Pandey et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2006). Our results
indicate that both Gbg1 and Gbg2 dimers mediate this response,
although their involvements are different. Gbg1 is mostly in-
volved in the osmotic component of the glucose response,
although involvement in glucose signaling cannot be discounted,
while Gbg2 plays a role in glucose signaling but not in osmotic
stress. The apparent contradiction of our results with the previ-
ously reported wild-type sensitivity of agb1-2 to a different
osmotic agent, sorbitol (Pandey et al., 2006), can be explained
by the masking effect that light intensity (used in that study) has
on osmotic response (cf. Figure 6E with 6D). These data further
Figure 8. Two Arabidopsis Gg Subunits Provide Functional Selectivity to
the Gbg Dimer.
Summary of the involvement of each Gbg dimer in pathogen resistance,
germination, lateral root development, and gravitropism.
Selectivity by G Protein g Subunits 1245
illustrate the complexity of the germination process, implicating
at least two independent signaling pathways involving Gbg1 and
Gbg2 dimers and the additional effect of light intensity.
The fact that AGB1- and AGG1-deficient mutants are hyper-
sensitive to osmotica raises the attractive possibility of the
involvement of Gbg1 signaling in osmoregulation (Zhu, 2002).
The high expression levels observed for AGB1 and AGG1 in
hydathods, highly specialized osmoregulatory organs, also sug-
gests such a speculation.
g Subunits Provide Functional Selectivity to the Gbg Dimer
There are substantial similarities, but also important differences,
between animal and plant heterotrimeric G proteins. They are
structurally similar, suggesting a conserved mechanism of action
(i.e., once a G protein–coupled receptor is activated, the asso-
ciated G protein will dissociate and transduce the signal to
downstream effectors through two functionally distinct subunits,
Ga and Gbg). However, plant G proteins lack the multiplicity of
genes encoding each of the subunits, as in animals. It is this
multiplicity that provides numerous combinatorial possibilities to
the whole heterotrimer in order to mediate the action of hundreds
of receptors in animal systems. Having single Ga and Gb
subunits begs the question of how plant G proteins are involved
in a large variety of plant processes (Jones, 2002; Assmann,
2004; Jones and Assmann, 2004). The existence of two different
Gg subunits provides functional diversity to the entire hetero-
trimer for effector activation and receptor specificity. The simi-
larities of the phenotypes displayed by Gb- and Gg-deficient
mutants provide a functional association between the Gb subunit
and each of the Gg subunits in plants, showing that both Gg
subunits form functional Gbg dimers. We also showed that the
two Gg subunits serve independent, redundant, or complemen-
tary roles in planta, depending on the process and the tissue
being studied. In some processes, such as defense against
necrotrophic fungi, only one Gg subunit is involved (AGG1). In
other processes, such as auxin signaling and the development of
lateral roots, both subunits are involved but are mechanistically
different in their operation. In other processes, such as germi-
nation, both Gg subunits are involved but with independent roles,
with AGG2 implicated in glucose signaling and AGG1 mediating
the response to osmotica (Figure 8).
In summary, the differential behavior of the Gg mutants in
known Gb-mediated response pathways demonstrates that Gg
subunits provide functional selectivity to the plant heterotrimeric
G proteins, providing a mechanism underlying the complexity in
G protein–mediated signaling in plants.
METHODS
Plant Materials
The agg1-1 mutant allele of AGG1 in the Ws ecotype of Arabidopsis
thaliana was generated and provided by the Institut National de la
Recherche Agronomique (Versailles) (FLAG flanking sequence tag num-
ber 197F06) (Brunaud et al., 2002; Samson et al., 2002). The AGG2 allele
agg2-1 in the Col-0 ecotype was obtained from the Salk Arabidopsis
T-DNA mutant collection (Alonso et al., 2003) (SALK_010956). For each
line, homozygous plants were selected using a three-primer PCR ap-
proach. PCR products across the insertion points were sequenced to
confirm the exact position of the T-DNA.
The agg1-1 allele was introgressed into the Col-0 background by
crossing agg1-1w with wild-type Col-0 plants and the hybrids back-
crossed to wild-type Col-0 for eight successive generations. Isolation of
the hybrids and backcrosses carrying the agg1-1 allele was performed by
selecting for BASTA resistance conferred by the BAR gene present on the
T-DNA (Samson et al., 2002). The final mutant line was designated agg1-
1c. The double agg1 agg2 mutant was obtained by crossing agg1-1c with
agg2-1. Plants carrying both homozygous alleles were identified from the
segregating F2 population using BASTA selection and PCR analysis.
AGG1 and AGG2 RNAi constructs were generated as follows.
An ;400-bp cDNA fragment for each of the genes was amplified by
PCR using elongase (Invitrogen) and the following primers: for AGG1,
59-CTCGAGGAATTCCTCTCTCTGACGTTGTCAGATC-39 and 59-ATC-
GATTGGTACCCATGTAAAATGATATCCTAGC-39; for AGG2, 59-CTCGA-
GATCTAGAGATGGAAGCGGGTAGCTCAA-39 and 59-AAGCTTGGATCC-
CCAATTACATCAAATTCACTG-39. Restriction sites (underlined) were
added at the ends of each primer for cloning into the pKANNIBAL vector
(Wesley et al., 2001). Subsequently, the hairpin cassette was cloned into
the binary vector pUQC477 obtained from Bernard J. Carroll (University of
Queensland, Australia). Arabidopsis plants (Col-0 ecotype) were trans-
formed by floral dipping (Clough and Bent, 1998). Primary transformants
were selected with BASTA. Fifteen and 12 independent transgenic lines
were obtained for agg1RNAi and agg2RNAi, respectively, and analyzed
by RNA gel blot hybridization for downregulation of the corresponding
genes. Lines with no detectable levels of mRNA were subjected to RT-
PCR to confirm the lack of detectable message.
The promoter regions of AGB1, AGG1, and AGG2 were amplified from
wild-type Arabidopsis (Col-0 ecotype) genomic DNA using the following
primers: for AGG1, 59-CACCGCCGAGGAATCGATCTGGCAT-39 and
59-TTGCAGAAAAATGCCAAAACGCCCAA-39; for AGG2, 59-CACCCTT
GGCTCGTACTTCGAT-39 and 59-CAAAATTTCTCGAATTCAACCCTCA-39;
for AGB1, 59-AACTCGAGTTACAAGCGAGCTTG-39 and 59-TTGGATCC-
ATTCCGGGATCAGACTTAGGCTTC-39. Restriction sites (underlined) were
added at the ends of each primer for cloning purposes. Primers were
generally designed to amplify the 59 upstream region of each gene starting
immediately upstream of the start codon. AGG1:GUS and AGG2:GUS
lines were generated as described by Chen et al. (2006c). The AGB1
promoter fragment was cloned into pGEM-T Easy vector (Promega) and
then transferred using XhoI and BamHI into the pAOV-intron-GUS vector
(Mylne and Botella, 1998). The constructs were transformed into Arabi-
dopsis (Col-0 ecotype) by Agrobacterium tumefaciens–mediated trans-
formation (Bechtold et al., 1993). GUS staining was performed as
described by Petsch et al. (2005).
Pathogen Preparation and Inoculations
Fusarium oxysporum (f. sp conglutinans) (BRIP 5176; Department of
Primary Industries, Queensland, Australia) and Alternaria brassicicola
(isolate UQ4273) were grown and plants were inoculated as described
previously (Trusov et al., 2006).
Plate Assays
All plates contained 0.53 or 13 MS basal salts (PhytoTechnology
Laboratories), 0.8% agar, and 1% sucrose unless stated otherwise.
Stock solutions of MeJA and abscisic acid were added to autoclaved
medium cooled to ;558C at the designated concentrations. Seeds were
sterilized in a 50% ethanol:1.5% peroxide solution and washed with
sterile water or by incubation in a chamber filled with chlorine gas. After
sowing, all seeds were stratified for 72 h at 48C in darkness. Germination
was determined as an obvious protrusion of the radicle. For root assays,
seedlings were grown on vertical plates for 14 or 21 d, and the number of
1246 The Plant Cell
lateral roots was counted using a microscope. For gravitropic response
assays, sterilized seeds were germinated and seedlings were grown
vertically for 5 d under continuous light on square plates and then moved
into darkness for another 24 h. Then, the plates were rotated 908 and left in
darkness for 24 h. Seedlings were photographed and angle was mea-
sured from the digital images using NIH ImageJ software.
Isolation of RNA and Transcription Analysis
Total RNA for RNA gel blot analysis and RT-PCR was extracted as
described previously (Purnell and Botella, 2007). Probes for RNA gel blots
were labeled using the Rediprime II 32P radiolabeling kit (Amersham).
Membranes were hybridized overnight in Church buffer (Church and
Gilbert, 1984) at 658C, washed twice in 0.1% SSC (13 SSC is 0.15 M NaCl
and 0.015 M sodium citrate) and 0.1% SDS solution, and exposed to
PhosphorImager plates for analysis (Molecular Dynamics). For RT-PCR,
reverse transcription and PCR amplification were performed as de-
scribed by Cazzonelli et al. (2005). PCR amplifications were performed
using 35 cycles with the following parameters: 948C for 30 s, 548C for 30 s,
and 728C for 1 min. The primers used for the AGG1 and AGG2 genes were
as follows: agg1f, 59-TGCGAGAGGAAACTGTGGTTTACG-39; agg1r,
J.P., Marzluff, W.F., and Jones, A.M. (2006). A Golgi-localized hexose
transporter is involved in heterotrimeric G protein-mediated early
development in Arabidopsis. Mol. Biol. Cell 17: 4257–4269.
Wang, X.-Q., Ullah, H., Jones, A.M., and Assmann, S.M. (2001). G
protein regulation of ion channels and abscisic acid signaling in
Arabidopsis guard cells. Science 292: 2070–2072.
Weiss, C., Garnaat, C., Mukai, K., Hu, Y., and Ma, H. (1994). Isolation
of cDNAs encoding guanine nucleotide-binding protein b-subunit
homologues from maize (ZGB1) and Arabidopsis (AGB1). Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 91: 9554–9558.
Weiss, C.A., Huang, H., and Ma, H. (1993). Immunolocalization of the
G-protein a-subunit encoded by the Gpa1 gene in Arabidopsis. Plant
Cell 5: 1513–1528.
Wesley, S.V., et al. (2001). Construct design for efficient, effective and
high-throughput gene silencing in plants. Plant J. 27: 581–590.
Zhu, J.-K. (2002). Salt and drought stress signal trunsduction in plants.
Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 53: 247–273.
1250 The Plant Cell
DOI 10.1105/tpc.107.050096; originally published online April 27, 2007; 2007;19;1235-1250Plant Cell
David Anderson, Jin-Gui Chen, Alan M. Jones and José Ramón BotellaYuri Trusov, James Edward Rookes, Kimberley Tilbrook, David Chakravorty, Michael Glenn Mason,
Arabidopsis Dimer Signaling inγβ Subunits Provide Functional Selectivity in GγHeterotrimeric G Protein